Pitt holds off Duke in record-setting fashion
TribLIVE Sports Videos
DURHAM, N.C. — Pitt coach Paul Chryst surveyed the wreckage, found several happy survivors and pondered what to do next after his team surrendered 733 all-purpose yards and eight touchdowns in a 58-55 victory Saturday against Duke.
“This is who we are right now,” he said after Pitt (2-1, 1-1) won its first ACC game. “We have to do what we can as a coaching staff to find ways to help. We have to work to get better.”
The aftermath, however, didn't feel like a loss.
Senior quarterback Tom Savage had his way with the Duke secondary, completing 23 of 33 passes for 424 yards, no interceptions and six touchdown passes. The half-dozen scoring throws tied an ACC record and fell one short of the Pitt record.
Receivers Devin Street and Tyler Boyd were dominant, and freshman running back James Conner (26 carries, 173 yards, one touchdown) appeared to climb to the top of the depth chart.
Street had the eighth 100-yard game of his career (six catches, 166 yards and two touchdowns), and Boyd (eight receptions, 154 yards, three touchdowns) made Pitt history.
The freshman from Clairton is the first Pitt player since Dorin Dickerson in 2009 to make three touchdown grabs and the first freshman since Antonio Bryant in 1999 with two consecutive 100-yard games.
“It was fun,” Savage said. “It's easy to do that with those guys.”
Even redshirt junior receiver Kevin Weatherspoon, who hadn't made a reception in his time at Pitt until Saturday, made the play of the game, a diving, 13-yard grab near the sideline on third down to allow Pitt to run out the clock in the fourth quarter.
Duke quarterback Brandon Connette — a backup playing only because Anthony Boone has a broken collarbone — either flourished or failed. He threw for 323 yards and four touchdowns and ran for 101 and two more scores. Pitt intercepted four of his passes, including linebacker Anthony Gonzalez's 37-yard return for a touchdown in the fourth quarter that gave Pitt a 58-41 lead with 8:30 to play.
But Duke (2-2, 0-2) scored twice after that to help create a record number of combined points for a Pitt game, surpassing a 63-48 West Virginia victory over the Panthers in 1965.
“We have to be better at closing out a game,” Chryst said.
“We need to work on some stuff,” said defensive tackle Aaron Donald, who had a sack and another tackle for a loss. “We got a win, so we're going to be happy about the win, but I'm kind of disappointed as far as letting them score 55 points on us. I'm real disappointed in that part.”
Street, who has been around long enough to have seen some devastating losses, said he couldn't help but think about Pitt losing leads against Iowa in 2011 and Notre Dame last year.
“Those close games, we couldn't finish,” he said. “Today was a true test. I think it's a good indication of where we're at. Wins and losses come a dime a dozen, but effort can't be matched.”
Then he added: “Of course, we have to get better.”
Pitt had trouble coping with Duke's hurry-up offense a week after controlling New Mexico's less-effective read-option attack.
“I thought last week we did a better job of assignment football,” Chryst said. “When they spread you apart, if one guy is off, whether his eyes are wrong or (he) doesn't defeat a block ...”
He didn't finish the thought, but it's clear he will demand improvement on defense before next weekend's game against Virginia. In three games, Pitt has allowed 123 points. Last season it took Pitt six games to reach that number.
“We found a way to win,” Chryst said, “and we found a way to make it close.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Rossi: After L.A., NFL should tread carefully
- Starter Liriano strikes out 12, leads Pirates to series sweep of Mets
- Acme man’s ephemeral sculptures appear to defy laws of physics
- Neighbor arrested after McKeesport house fire, authorities say
- Kennywood fanatic, 82, rides Jack Rabbit 95 times in a row
- Cochran repair center planned in Harrison
- Early success in White House race a pleasant surprise for Carson
- Pirates notebook: Substance rule a sticky subject
- Motorcyclist killed after striking pole in Penn Township
- Memorial Day service in National Cemetery of the Alleghenies still growing
- Oncologists wary of scaled-back guidelines in cancer screenings